A New Era of Academic Solidarity
A quiet revolution is taking place in higher education—but not in classrooms or laboratories. It’s happening in Faculty Senates, university councils, and academic governance bodies across the country. These groups are sounding the alarm and organizing in response to the escalating political incursions into academic life. From ideological censorship to budgetary threats, state and federal actors are increasingly targeting public universities—especially those committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Now, faculty and institutional leaders are responding with something both pragmatic and profound: Mutual Academic Defense Compacts.
At the University of Massachusetts Amherst, Rutgers University, and Indiana University Bloomington, faculty bodies have passed resolutions to establish such compacts within their respective higher education networks. The central idea is simple: an attack on one institution should be treated as an attack on all. These alliances call for the pooling of resources—legal, financial, and strategic—to defend against politically motivated incursions. They represent a fundamental shift in how universities engage with authoritarian threats: no longer as isolated victims, but as coordinated defenders of academic freedom and democratic governance.
While faculty have long been vocal about threats to academic freedom, these compacts mark a turning point in how universities respond. Rather than issuing individual statements or hoping that controversy will pass, or trying to hide (I know a university nearby using this approach), faculty are now taking collective action. These mutual defense compacts are more than symbolic gestures; they represent the infrastructure of resistance. They aim to ensure that when universities are politically targeted—whether over curriculum, hiring practices, or research agendas—they can respond rapidly, forcefully, and in solidarity.
This is not just a movement. It’s a mobilization. The compacts emerging from Rutgers, Indiana, and UMass represent the early contours of a broader national strategy to defend higher education from authoritarian encroachment. And the time for action is now. As political attacks on academic institutions intensify, the preservation of public higher education as a space for critical thought, innovation, and truth-telling depends on how boldly and collectively we respond.
Rutgers Leads the Big Ten: A Call for Alliance-Wide Action
Rutgers University followed suit by calling for a similar compact across the Big Ten Academic Alliance (BTAA). With 18 member universities serving over 600,000 students, the BTAA is more than just an athletic consortium—it is a powerhouse of academic and research collaboration. The resolution passed by the Rutgers University Senate urges President Jonathan Holloway to initiate the formation of a Mutual Academic Defense Compact (MADC) among Big Ten institutions. The message is clear: academic freedom should be defended collectively, not just individually.
The Rutgers proposal lays out a multi-pronged strategy. Participating institutions would commit to a shared defense fund, offer access to legal counsel, and coordinate communications and public responses in times of crisis. This is not simply about issuing statements of support; it is about activating real resources when a member institution is attacked. These actions could include filing amicus briefs, initiating countersuits, mobilizing legislative advocacy, or launching media campaigns to challenge political incursions head-on.
Faculty advocate Jim Sherman, who authored the resolution, framed the compact as both a defensive measure and a statement of values. “This is a first step,” he said. “It’s saying we want to stand up. We want to stand with others and get this done.” His urgency reflects a growing sentiment among faculty across the nation: that delay is complicity. As Sherman noted, “If we sit and wait… more and more of our faculty, students, staff will be anxious, will lose jobs, will be threatened.”
The resolution also addresses logistical concerns, including the legal complexities of moving funds across state lines. Provost Rahul Shrivastav of Indiana University acknowledged those challenges, while affirming the tightly knit nature of Big Ten leadership.
Indiana University Bloomington Joins the Movement
On April 8, 2025, the Indiana University Bloomington Faculty Council added its voice to the growing movement by passing a resolution in support of the Big Ten Mutual Academic Defense Compact. Their action represents a vital endorsement from one of the nation’s most prominent public research universities and signals growing momentum behind the compact. The Indiana resolution echoes Rutgers’ and calls for university leadership to work with peers across the Big Ten to formalize the alliance.
Jim Sherman, who also proposed the Indiana resolution, emphasized the need for immediate action rather than prolonged deliberation. “I suspect there will be changes down the road,” Sherman acknowledged. “But if we sit and wait… more and more of our faculty, students, staff will be anxious, will lose jobs, will be threatened.” His words capture the essence of this new academic organizing ethos: urgency, solidarity, and readiness. Inaction is no longer an option.
Indiana’s resolution makes clear that the compact is not merely a symbolic gesture. It is designed to marshal legal, academic, and communicative resources for real-world defense. The resolution calls for immediate implementation steps, including outreach to other Big Ten universities and coordination of legal and public affairs support. As Sherman said, this is just the beginning of a longer-term effort to build infrastructure and resilience against political incursion.
The UMass Model: Defending the Land-Grant Mission
The faculty at the University of Massachusetts Amherst also took a formal stand against authoritarian overreach by passing a resolution calling for a “Public and Land-Grant University Mutual Academic Defense Compact” (PLUMADC). Their initiative is rooted in the recognition that state threats to funding, curriculum, and academic integrity have reached a new level of severity. The resolution notes that in some states, funding restoration has been used as leverage to force universities into compliance with ideologically driven mandates—an alarming trend that undermines both academic freedom and institutional autonomy.
UMass Amherst’s resolution offers a blueprint for other public and land-grant institutions. It proposes coordinated legal representation, rapid-response communication teams, public advocacy campaigns, and the creation of a pooled defense fund. These are not abstract ideas—they are tactical tools designed to counteract real-time threats. By moving beyond rhetoric and into operational planning, UMass has shown how universities can convert outrage into action. It has also reaffirmed that land-grant institutions, founded to serve the public good, must stand firm in the face of political pressure.
The proposal is especially timely as executive orders from the Trump administration and Republican-led state legislatures have increasingly sought to defund or dismantle university DEI programs, censor curriculum, and exert control over faculty appointments. These developments pose existential threats to the integrity of public universities. UMass’s initiative is a direct response to these incursions and asserts that institutions must not wait to be targeted individually—they must organize in anticipation of collective risk.
PLUMADC’s guiding principle is that public universities share a moral and institutional responsibility to protect each other. If one institution is attacked and fails to receive support, it sets a dangerous precedent for others. But if every university knows it has allies ready to act—legally, financially, and publicly—the cost of authoritarian overreach becomes far greater. It’s a strategic deterrent as much as it is a defense strategy. And it offers a compelling model for higher education systems across the country.
Toward a National Compact: What Comes Next?
The efforts underway at UMass Amherst, Rutgers, and Indiana represent more than isolated reactions—they are laying the foundation for a national strategy. What if a broader National Mutual Academic Defense Compact emerged? Such a network could include land-grant universities, MSIs, HBCUs, and liberal arts colleges across red and blue states. Together, they could form a unified front against the authoritarian attacks that threaten not only academic freedom but the soul of higher education.
This national compact would have several key pillars. First, a centralized or distributed legal defense fund to assist institutions facing legal challenges. Second, a rapid-response communications team to shape public narratives in moments of political crisis. Third, research and policy capacity to counteract legislative threats. Fourth, a commitment to cross-institutional solidarity—including faculty exchanges, public events, and joint resolutions. The infrastructure is possible. What is needed is the will.
The NAACP, AAUP, and major foundations could play key roles in scaling up these initiatives. Likewise, organizations like the American Council on Education and the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities could offer institutional support. The idea is not to duplicate what’s already happening but to federate and accelerate it. The academic community has long valued autonomy—but autonomy does not mean isolation. Now is the time to organize.
In the words of Sun Tzu from The Art of War, “If he is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him. If your opponent is of choleric temper, seek to irritate him… Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant.” These ancient strategies remind us: power is not just about defense—it’s about positioning, preparation, and unity. The compact movement is a declaration that universities will no longer wait passively as targets of ideological warfare. Together, we are mobilizing not only to defend—but to endure and to prevail.
Please share this post widely.